Some Russian media outlets claim that HIMARS launchers operating in Donbass are secretly being led, operated, and guarded by NATO servicemen. Are these allegations true, or at least plausible? Well, let’s see.
The HIMARS mobile artillery operating Ukraine are manned by outstaffed career NATO military personnel, and information regarding the advanced weapons systems’ operation is not being transferred to the Ukrainian side due to a lack of trust, a Russian security source has told Sputnik, citing intelligence received from sources inside the Ukrainian military.
“According to information received from sources in the Ukrainian Armed Forces, at least two HIMARS are operating in the southern direction, with the remaining 10 dispersed in the northern arc, in the area of active hostilities” in Donbass, the source, who requested anonymity, said.
Further, the source indicated that targets are selected using US military satellites, and that HIMARS operate in a shoot-and-scoot manner, quickly changing their positions after firing to avoid return fire, and never returning to positions where they have previously been deployed.
In addition, the source said that each time that HIMARs salvos are launched, they are covered by several additional salvos from less advanced artillery, such as Uragan and Smerch, with the goal being to saturate Russian air defenses and deplete munitions before HIMARS rounds are launched. The mobile artillery are moved around and fired in the dead of night.
Here are the key takeaways, simplified:
–NATO does not trust Ukrainian soldiers to operate HIMARS themselves, presumably for a number of reasons. Ukrainian crews might not be competent enough to perform these high-speed “shoot and scoot” missions without being detected and destroyed by Russian counter-battery fire, Ukrainian neo-nazis might be too tempted to Russian territory, Ukrainian commanders might be too corrupt and sell HIMARS launchers and munitions, or all the above.
–HIMARS are being used for shoot and scoot missions. HIMARS is an ideal self-propelled artillery platform with the ability to complete a fire mission while completely “buttoned up,” meaning it can emplace, and leave immediately afterward without the need for time spent setting up or taking down equipment.
–Russian defenses are oversaturated with missiles from older, less advanced launchers. Not only does that help ensure the HIMARS rounds reach their target, that might also slow down the reaction time for Russian counterbattery fire.
Of course this completely contradicts the narrative being spoon-fed to Americans and our colonies in Europe:
Here are the NATO talking points:
-HIMARS launchers are “wunderwaffe” that operate alone.
-All the crews are Ukrainian with no NATO involvement
-The usual appeals to emotion that Ukraine can win, but only if Americans and Europeans make more sacrifices so their governments can afford to print more money to manufacture additional weapons.
-The war itself is portrayed like a cool sci-fi 4th Generation War, like in a 1990s Tom Clancy novel or a video game. Of course the real conflict is a grueling artillery duel like in World War II or even World War I. That’s horrifying industrial warfare that can’t be won by wunderwaffe, and has high risks of escalating. For that reason, European and especially American audiences have to be insulated from the truth as much as possible.
Regarding these alleged Ukrainian crews, they received a 3-week crash course on HIMARS at an undisclosed training location outside of the country. But is three weeks realistically enough to create self-sufficient crews, especially in a high-stakes environment where even a small mistake can cause instant death and destruction of the vehicle? Well, let’s refer to the website for Fort Sill, Oklahoma, home of the US Army’s artillery school:
13M MULTIPLE LAUNCH ROCKET SYSTEM CREW MEMBER – 6 WEEKS
13P MLRS FIRE DIRECTION SPECIALIST – 6 WEEKS, 4 DAYS
Is it theoretically possible to condense 6 weeks of training into just 3 weeks? Yes, especially if the students are already familiar with other MLRS systems, with at least some of that knowledge being transferrable to the HIMARS.
However, there is much more to the HIMARS than simply operating the vehicle itself. The system has a massive logistical footprint, and like everything else, it needs regular maintenance and can break. The 94P MLRS Repairer course is 19 weeks. Can that be condensed down to three weeks?
Even if it’s possible to train competent crews in three weeks, is it a good idea to send these novices back to Ukraine with no supervision? Color me skeptical. In every proxy war throughout history, regardless of participants, countries that ship weapons invariably send instructors and advisors with those weapons, and I cannot think of even one example to the contrary. It also helps that, as long range MLRS, HIMARS can operate far behind friendly lines with very low risk of being captured.
More than anything else, HIMARS are wunderwaffe, so they need to produce tangible results and they need to be safeguarded as much as possible. It also helps that HIMARS have seen some use in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria, so there are plenty of combat veterans in the US Army and Marine Corps who could be asked to volunteer. Those volunteers were then presumably discharged from their enlistment/officer contracts, so in case they are killed, there isn’t a paper trail.
As of right now, I see now way to definitively prove this idea, and there is plausible deniability, but it seems ridiculous to deny that’s what almost certainly happened.
Ian Kummer
Support my work by making a contribution through Boosty
All text in Reading Junkie posts are free to share or republish without permission, and I highly encourage my fellow bloggers to do so. Please be courteous and link back to the original.
I now have a new YouTube channel that I will use to upload videos from my travels around Russia. Expect new content there soon. Please give me a follow here.
Also feel free to connect with me on Quora (I sometimes share unique articles there).
That.was a great post and very insightful. You mentioned the artillery duels of WW1. MoA and Saker commenters with their historical perspective say Russia is finishing WW1 (1914-2022). They have a very interesting take on history I must say and more truthful.
American greed and subservience to London is the reason Wilson lied us into WW1. We should have been neutral.
Another thought regarding Tom Clancy. I read his first two books and immediately thought I could have done better. You can do exponentially better. I thoroughly enjoyed Ultraviolence by the way.
I do not find it incredible that Ukr artillerymen could be brought up to speed quickly, especially if they are training on mock consoles that are not the actual launchers. The Americans are commanding them, giving them co-ordinates, and in continual communications.
The story is not the launchers and punching in some co-ordinates, but the infrastructure to keep them in good repair and loaded, organizing the replacing of pods, etc. The ammunition is very very expensive, so the question would be how liberally would the Ukr army be popping these off if they were paying for the shells themselves, or needed to go after target co-ordinates on their own.
The infrastructure to keep them repaired is what me doubt the Ukrainians are manning them entirely alone without NATO instructors. Keeping a HIMARS in working order isn’t something you can adequately train someone to do in a quick crash course for dummies.